The BBC is to be made to suffer due to the failures of private funded commercial television, in a series of government policies aimed at smashing the BBC and forcing the quality down, the latest announcements have gone almost unoticed.

A new kind of TV station is coming soon to the UK, "City TV" will be a a very localized kind of TV station which will have coverage areas similar to local radio stations, often covering just one city like Manchester, Liverpool or Glasgow, though some will cover two or three neighbouring towns, like Newcastle + Sunderland or Leeds + Bradford for example.

Part of the start up costs and initial funding of these new commercial TV stations will come from the BBC, which actualy makes me extremely angry because many of us who live in more rural areas will never recieve one of these new stations, yet we will be paying towards them - WHY ?

Why is public money been used to help a private commercial concern to become viable ?

THE PREASSURE WHICH THE BBC SUDENLY FINDS ITSELF IN

The licence fee has been frozen for six years - resulting in a massive real terms cut

The BBC is been forced to take over all the funding of the World Service

The BBC is been made to fund the whole of "Monitoring Services" which was partly funded by the government

The BBC must contribute to the running costs of Channel S4C, the Welsh language channel

The BBC must contribute to the setting up of and initial running costs of the new City TV stations

Everyone keeps saying how much money this will save, not least the chancellor George Osborne, but no one seems to mention how quality and output will deterioate and worsen, the fact that we are going to sacrifice the quality of the BBC in the name of savings has never been mentioned.

Allready it has been announced only this week that many BBC local stations will merge output, effectively losing the local element to local radio, so whats the point of local radio if its NOT local. ?

Naturaly this will give the commercial stations an advantage, that is if you dont mind listening to a choir singing about a local drain cleaning company, or some DJ telling you that now is the time to buy your Christmas gifts - on the 1st November.

Soon the BBC will stop making programmes for daytime viewers, as a result of the financial preassure forced on the BBC by this government, day time viewing will in future consist mostly of repeats.

I suspect that the government is attempting to drive the BBC down to levels associated with SKY, a tv network which makes no tv programmes and where public service means nothing, or possibly they wish to make the BBC like ITV - a network so strapped for cash that they no longer make childrens programmes and can barely afford to carry on providing local news.

Based on the novel by Len Deighton, SS-GB is an alternate take on history set in the 1940s after the Germans won the Battle Of Britain, with London now under Nazi occupation. It follows Scotland Yard detective Archer who, while investigating what appears to be a simple black market murder, must decide whether to join the resistance movement or effectively collaborate with the SS.

A nice piece of anti-German propaganda, presumably to reinforce prejudices against the strongest country in the EU and to make us feel that Brexit is a good move, even if it does make most people worse off. The Second World War only lasted 5 years and 8 months, yet 72 years after it finished we still seem to be obsessed with it, although so many of us don't appreciate the creeping menace of home-grown fascism.

Meanwhile back in the real world, why would anyone think the BBC might have a right-wing bias these days?

76 MPs, mostly Conservative, have signed a letter to BBC director-general Tony Hall complaining that the broadcaster has been “insufficiently optimistic” in its post-referendum Brexit coverage. Among the signatories are prominent Brexiters such as Douglas Carswell, Bill Cash, Iain Duncan Smith, Kate Hoey, John Redwood and Jacob Rees-Mogg.

Confronted with the most important political question of our generation and a Leave campaign typified by its decision to place an outright falsehood at the centre of its material, the BBC bottled it during the referendum. The broadcaster opted for spurious balance, failing to challenge the tendentious figures offered by politicians – perhaps mindful of the then culture secretary’s attacks on it for being pro-European.

Since the referendum the heat has been off, and the BBC has rediscovered some of its backbone. Hence this attempt to muzzle the organisation again, the letter acting as both political warning shot and ammunition for the Brexit big guns of the tabloid press. The group slams the BBC for prefacing “economic good news” with the words “despite Brexit”. But this practice isn’t evidence of some deep bias at the broadcaster, it’s because the good news is “despite” the referendum vote. What’s more, Brexit hasn’t even happened, but some of the news has been bad. Inflation has shot up to 2.3%, in part because the pound plunged after June 23.

The parliamentarians have flung a host of unsubstantiated accusations against the BBC, including that it misrepresents the country as xenophobic and that it is biased. If the BBC buckles to the pressure, it will let down its viewers and listeners again – just as it did in the referendum.

Prominent University of East Anglia law lecturer Paul Bernal said: “Nothing makes me more sympathetic to Corbyn than seeing how @bbcLauraK and @BBCNickRobinson behave towards him. And I’m no Corbyn fan.”

During campaigning, Theresa May’s press team regularly refuse to allow questions from reporters who are “not on their list”, and those who are approved have to submit their questions in advance. Our so-called 'strong and stable' leader is too weak and pathetic to think on her feet and can only churn out her pre-prepared robotic claptrap.

At a closed event yesterday in York, the first reporter Theresa May called by name to offer her a question was Eleanor Garnier. Well there's a surprise!

On the BBC breakfast show they has an item where a panel of voters from all parties in Bristol were asked questions about what was important to them etc...At the end of the item the reporter thanked the Tory supporter for not saying "Strong and Stable" during his part......Was this just an accident or just more of BBC's bias?....I know what I think...

Some of the revelations are shocking. £2.2 million for Chris Evans and £600,000 for the past-his-sell-by-date John Humphrys stand out for me in particular. But the question we have to ask is what was the Tories' real motive in making the BBC disclose these high salaries?

The only conclusion I come to is that it's part of the Tory plan to further undermine the BBC, another of those pesky national institutions which they'd love to destroy. The revelations will make it easier for commercial television companies to poach BBC staff, since they now know what they get paid (I refuse to say 'earn') and can then offer them a significant amount more to defect. The BBC could of course then persuade them to stay with an even higher remuneration, but that would put more pressure on the institution to balance its books and remain a viable competitor with the likes of the Murdoch media empire.

Regular listeners to BBC Radio will get even more NEWS on all channels from January, now that Ofcom is taking charge. The first time in 95 years that the Beeb has had to consult anyone else. Radio 4 must broadcast 2,750 hours a year of News, 6 Music at least 6 hours of News a week. 75% of Five Live must consist of News and Current Affairs (i.e. Not sport). Radio 2 is going to have to include much more News content.

No figures are available as to how often QT must have Nigel Farage on its panel.

"The BBC​ is and has long been the most refined propaganda service in the world." (John Pilger)

Bias by omission is a favourite trick of the BBC. Failing to report demonstrations against our Tory government is one such example. And did anyone see or hear any mention of this on the BBC? I certainly didn't.